How Clean is your Cloud - Apple responds

Our new report “How Clean is Your Cloud” is out today - to show that the massive increase in Internet use is mainly being powered by dirty energy. Apple, Amazon and Microsoft all score badly in the report for relying on dirty coal and dangerous nuclear power for their data centres.

Since 2010, and again in 2011, we have been calling on all the major Internet companies to come clean about the amount and type of power behind the Internet services we use everyday.

In a statement issued in response to the report, Apple disclosed for the first time that the data center would consume about 20 million watts at full capacity - much lower than Greenpeace's estimate, which is 100 million watts. In territory served by Duke, a million watts is enough to power 750 to 1,000 homes.

Kristin Huguet, a spokeswoman for Apple, added that the company is building two large projects intended to offset energy use from the grid in North Carolina: an array of solar panels and a set of fuel cells.

While it is good to see Apple acknowledge it should reveal more details of the energy consumption of its data centres, the information they released today does not add up with what they have reported to be the size of the investment and physical size of the data centre.

When Apple announced they were building a data centre in North Carolina, they announced a commitment to invest $1 Billion (USD) over 10 years. For a number of the facilities in the “How Clean is Your Cloud?” report, we made estimates of power demand using fairly conservative industry benchmarks for data centre investments: 1MW of power demand from servers for every $15 million, though the number is often closer to $8 million for many companies. Thus, a $1 billion investment should net Apple 66MW of computer power demand. Assuming a fairly standard energy efficiency factor for new data centres for non-computer energy demand of 50% gives you a 100MW data center. While Apple is well known for making more expensive consumer products, if Apple's plans for the $1 billion investment only generates 20MW in power demand, that would be taking the “Apple premium” to a whole new level.

Size Matters

The size of the facility at 500,000 sq foot would also indicate a much larger power demand. Amazon's chief web engineer recently conservatively estimated that based just on the size of the facility, the iDatacenter would consume at least 78MW, and speculated that it is probably higher.

We made these estimates because companies like Apple and Amazon have not disclosed details of how much energy data centres use now and will in the future. We provided Apple with our data prior to releasing the “How Clean is Your Cloud?” report, and while they did not agree with our estimate, they declined to provide specific information on their energy demand.

While we welcome Apple's attempt today to provide more specific details on its North Carolina iData Center, it does not appear to have provided the full story, and is instead seeking to provide select pieces of information to make their dirty energy footprint seem smaller.

The IT industry can be a part of the solution to old-fashioned problems like emissions from coal. Some companies, like Google, Yahoo and Facebook are already doing that, by taking steps to move toward powering their clouds with clean energy, not coal or nuclear. This campaign is creating an opportunity for Apple to join them and start becoming a part of the solution to climate change, so that we can deal with emissions from the growth of 'cloud computing' before it becomes an irreversible problem. Step one in seizing this opportunity is for companies to be transparent about their energy use.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) waynie
says:

I've been following similar stories to this for some time, and I believe that Apple are trying to turn things around. Wouldn't Apple know more...

I've been following similar stories to this for some time, and I believe that Apple are trying to turn things around. Wouldn't Apple know more about their power consumption than Greenpeace? Why am I seeing pictures on the internet of Greenpeace activists erecting banners and posters on top of solar panels?

Also, Apple has come a long way over the years. Rather than attack, isn't it always more mutually beneficial to work in partnership, or at least, encourage through positive reinforcement?

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) aking
says:

I have been a Greenpeace monthly donator for over 10 years - yet today, I cancelled my donation. Attempting to use Apple's high profile name to g...

I have been a Greenpeace monthly donator for over 10 years - yet today, I cancelled my donation. Attempting to use Apple's high profile name to get cheap publicity with incorrect and misleading data is wrong. Apple is building one of the country's largest solar and fuel cell generator station to power more than 50% of the datacentre - plus their next data centre being built on the west coast is going to be 100% powered by renewables - why isn't Greenpeace praising them for that!?!! Greenpeace lost alot of respect in my eyes today :/

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

Larry
says:

Activists Stay the Course!

These IT giants have the power to change the CARBON direction and SET a SUSTAINABLE ENERGY example for other ...

Activists Stay the Course!

These IT giants have the power to change the CARBON direction and SET a SUSTAINABLE ENERGY example for other companies to follow... and for consumers to choose, wisely...

Ocean Acidification is now irreversible... at least on timescales of at least... TENS of THOUSANDS of years...

Even with stabilisation of atmospheric CO2 at 450 ppm, Ocean Acidification will have profound impacts (death and extinction) on many marine systems.

LARGE and rapid reductions of global CO2 emissions are needed globally by at LEAST 50% by 2050.

Analysis of past events in Earth's geologic history suggests that chemical recovery (normal pH for LIFE in the Ocean) will take TENS of THOUSANDS of years - while the recovery of ecosystem function and biological diversity (LIFE AS WE KNOW IT) can take much longer. (MILLIONS OF YEARS)

http://interacademies.net/10878/13951.aspx
---

..:: "Every day, 70 MILLION TONS of CO2 are released into Earth's atmosphere. ( remaining in the atmosphere for thousands of years )

..:: "Every day, 20 MILLION TONS of that CO2 are absorbed into the OCEANS, thereby increasing the overall ACIDITY of the OCEANS.

By 2100, Ocean acidity will increase another 150 to 200 hundred percent.

This is a dramatic change in the acidity of the oceans. And it has a serious impact on our ocean ecosystems; in particular, it has an impact on any species of calcifying organism that produces a calcium carbonate SHELL.
-
http://www.ClimateWatch.NOAA.gov/video/2010/origin-impacts-ocean-acidification

---

..:: "These are changes that are occurring far too fast for the oceans to correct naturally, said Dr Richard Feely with the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

..:: "Fifty-five million years ago when we had an event like this (and that took over 10,000 years to occur), it took the oceans over 125,000 years to recover, just to get the chemistry back to normal," he told BBC News.

..:: "It took two to 10 million years for the organisms to re-evolve, to get back into a normal situation.

..:: "So what we do over the next 100 years will have implications for ocean ecosystems from tens of thousands to millions of years. That's the implication of what we're doing to the oceans right now."

--

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17088154

-
http://ecodelmar.org/phytoplankton
-

Calling all "Ocean Defenders", to INFORM the UN-informed "voting" American public of the danger of atmospheric CO2 produced by fossil fuel combustion... leading to global warming and Ocean Acidification... leading to the extinction of the base of the food chain in the Ocean and the loss of oxygen producing phytoplankton that is essential for Life on Earth... the only known planet with Life, as we know it, in the entire universe.

Keep saying it to everyone... until everyone is saying it to you.

http://EcoDelMar.org/phytoplankton

Until a critical mass of American "voters" can actually understand the OA problem, and stop living in denial, there will be no "political will" to solve the problem... mainly caused by Americans and the US military, ( http://EcoDelMar.org/Green_Military ) ... while believing their "might is right"... and believing in the infallibility of the human ego, while ignoring their own Spiritual appreciation/gratitude for Life itself... in effect, worshiping golden idols over Life.

While a critical mass of American "voters" stubbornly cling to a blatant denial of the findings of 98% of the top scientists of all time... the problem will not be seen by the "voters"... until it is too late.